U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

74–000PDF 2012

WESTERN HEMISPHERE BUDGET REVIEW 2013:

WHAT ARE U.S. PRIORITIES?

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

APRIL 25, 2012

Serial No. 112–152

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/ or

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/

(II)

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida, Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

DAN BURTON, Indiana 

ELTON GALLEGLY, California 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

RON PAUL, Texas 

MIKE PENCE, Indiana 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

CONNIE MACK, Florida 

JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida 

JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio 

BILL JOHNSON, Ohio 

DAVID RIVERA, Florida 

MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania 

TIM GRIFFIN, Arkansas 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

ANN MARIE BUERKLE, New York 

RENEE ELLMERS, North Carolina 

ROBERT TURNER, New York 

HOWARD L. BERMAN, California 

GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York 

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American 

Samoa 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

DENNIS CARDOZA, California 

BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

ALLYSON SCHWARTZ, Pennsylvania 

CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut 

FREDERICA WILSON, Florida 

KAREN BASS, California 

WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts 

DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

YLEEM D.S. POBLETE, Staff Director 

RICHARD J. KESSLER, Democratic Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE

CONNIE MACK, Florida, Chairman 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio 

DAVID RIVERA, Florida 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

ELTON GALLEGLY, California 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American 

Samoa 

DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

WITNESS 

The Honorable Roberta S. Jacobson, Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau 

of Western Hemisphere Affairs, U.S. Department of State .............................. 5

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

The Honorable Roberta S. Jacobson: Prepared statement ................................... 7

APPENDIX 

Hearing notice .......................................................................................................... 30

Hearing minutes ...................................................................................................... 31

The Honorable Connie Mack, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Florida, and chairman, Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere: 

Prepared statement .............................................................................................. 33

Material submitted for the record ...................................................................... 34

(1)

WESTERN HEMISPHERE BUDGET REVIEW 

2013: WHAT ARE U.S. PRIORITIES? 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 25, 2012

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE, COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS, Washington, DC. 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2 o’clock p.m., in room 

2172 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Connie Mack (chairman 

of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Mr. MACK. The subcommittee will come to order. I first want to 

thank everyone, especially our witness, for joining us for our hearing today. 

After recognizing myself and the ranking member, Mr. Engel, for 

5 minutes each for opening statements, I will recognize the members of the subcommittee for 2 minutes each, for their opening 

statements. We will then proceed directly to hear testimony from 

our distinguished witness. 

The full text of the written testimony will be inserted into the 

record. Without objections, members may have 5 days to submit 

statements and questions for the record. After we hear from our 

witness, individual members will be recognized for 5 minutes each 

for questions to our witness. And I now recognize myself for an 

opening statement. 

It is a new year, with a new budget hearing, and things look 

worse for the United States today than they did last year. We 

spent approximately $1.8 billion on programs in the Western Hemisphere last year, and we find that the region has less economic 

freedom, an increased homicide rate and reduced press freedom. If 

it was a private company generating this data instead of the U.S. 

Government, it would be made clear that the product is failing to 

provide desired results and the contract would not be extended. 

Unfortunately, these figures represent the outcome of the U.S. 

Government’s programs and this backsliding is compounded by an 

increased lack of respect for the United States. The headlines emanating from the Summit of the Americas widely reported that the 

United States is isolated within the region. You have been in a senior position on issues relating to the hemisphere for over 10 years. 

During this time we have not held the Organization of American 

States accountable for their inability or lack of desire to act on behalf of democracy in the hemisphere. Now we see the discussion of 

redefining democracy gaining steam in the region. While it may be 

a complex system of governing and is difficult to attain and maintain, democracy has but one definition: Government by the people. 

2

It is clear that Cuba does not have government by the people. 

Other nations in the region have mutilated government by the people by utilizing executive power to alter constitutions and by daily 

assaults on free speech. Democratic principles act as a standard for 

protecting freedom. If these principles slip within our region, the 

impact to security and the economy will be lasting. 

Over the past 10 years, U.S. assistance supporting democratic efforts has been cut while the OAS has received yearly increases. 

Nicaragua and Ecuador have worked counter to freedom and received a boost in U.S. funding, and new global climate change programs have maintained a healthy stipend. Meanwhile, our allies 

were dragged through a negative campaign on the free trade agreements, and frustrated on the Keystone XL pipeline. Are we to understand that $78 million spent on climate change programs outside of our country took priority over enhancing business partnerships and the principles of freedom for the citizens of our region? 

Backsliding in the hemisphere is extensive, with attacks on the 

press and business from Argentina to Ecuador, Ortega’s stealing 

the election in Nicaragua, Chavez’s involvement in all of the above 

while ceding Venezuela to drug traffickers and terrorists. Billions 

of dollars are going to fight the drug trade with countries who take 

a public stand against U.S. policies, all while the region bands together to demand the world’s longest dictatorship in Cuba a seat 

at the democratic gathering of nations. 

Assistant Secretary, I look forward to hearing how you will improve the markers on this declining state in which we find ourselves. As I have said, and I am sure you agree, the strengthening 

of our economy and the durability of our national security starts 

right here with the powerful economies in our region and at our 

borders. Unfortunately, our policies have come down to promoting 

the lowest common denominator in an attempt to maintain friends. 

In the end we have lost our friends and our values. 

I hope that you will explain how you will use your new position, and a requested $1.5 billion to set the United States on a more 

prosperous path forward, standing with our allies and putting our 

principles before our adversaries. 

With that I now recognize the ranking member, Mr. Engel, for 

5 minutes. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for 

holding this hearing today. With the Summit of the Americas having taken place in Cartagena, Colombia, just 11⁄2 weeks ago, this 

hearing is a timely review of U.S. policies and priorities in Latin 

America and the Caribbean. 

Before discussing our region, I would like to extend my warmest 

congratulations to Assistant Secretary Roberta Jacobson whose 

nomination was recently approved by the Senate. Roberta, your 

work is widely respected and your abilities are highly regarded by 

me and by many, many others. I could not be happier for you, for 

the Department, for our country, and I wish you the best of luck. 

And I am anxious to hear what you will be testifying about today. 

I must say, however, that your nomination was yet another example of how the nominations process in the Senate is failing. 

When individual senators can hold up qualified nonpolitical nominees like yourself due to one agenda or another, it just shows that 

3

the system is broken and the time to fix it is now. Mr. Chairman, 

so Mr. Mack, if you are in the other body I am going to count on 

you to fix the system. 

Mr. Chairman, you and I were with President Obama as well as 

Secretary Jacobson at the Summit of the Americas. We had the opportunity to speak with leaders of the region about the conditions 

in their countries, how they see the region, their ties with the 

United States. We learned a great deal about how our friends to 

the south view key issues including how to work together to halt 

the illicit drug trade and associated violence, and expand trade and 

prosperity to all people in our hemisphere. 

Personally, I would like to express my deepest thanks to President Obama for including me in his delegation at the Summit. It 

was eye opening to watch the proceedings, not from the angle of 

the legislative branch, but through the lens of the executive. And 

having been there, I must say that President Obama, Secretary 

Clinton and the rest of the U.S. team performed very well and represented our country with distinction. I thank them for our efforts. 

Many good things happened at the Summit of the Americas, 

many good things that the United States is doing. You wouldn’t 

necessarily know that from the media coverage who was focusing 

on the scandal, but believe me, there were many, many important 

things at that Summit and I was proud to be a part of it. 

Secretary Jacobson, I know the subcommittee is looking forward 

to hearing from you on some of the key issues we are monitoring 

in our region. I think we need to continue to assist Haiti so it can 

rebuild from the earthquake. We will listen carefully to your 

thoughts on how the drug crime is affecting our friends in Mexico, 

Central America and the Caribbean, and how our counter narcotics 

response is proceeding. We look forward to your comments on the 

more challenging countries in the hemisphere including Venezuela, 

Ecuador and others, and of course, Cuba. 

As Mr. Mack mentioned, many of the countries are demanding 

that the next time there is a Summit that Cuba be a part of it. I 

question and say, well, what is Cuba’s responsibility? We wanted 

to invite them, but what are they willing to do in order to get invited? And so far I don’t think we have seen very much. And with 

the U.S.-Colombia FTA entering force next month, we are hoping 

you will discuss how this will expand prosperity in the region and 

create jobs in the U.S., but also your thoughts on the status of implementation of the Labor Action Plan. 

So Mr. Chairman, I thank you again for holding this hearing, 

and I look forward to the testimony. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you, Mr. Engel. And I would now like to recognize Mr. Sires for 2 minutes for an opening statement. 

Mr. SIRES. Thank you, Chairman Mack. Congratulations on your 

confirmation. Congratulations on your appointment. You have an 

easy job. It is only about, I don’t know how many countries we 

have but—I would just share a couple of things of my concern. And 

first I want to thank Chairman Mack for taking the trip down to 

the Summit. It was very informative. And it was nice to see the 

Secretary there. 

But in meeting with the different Presidents and the different 

dignitaries that we met with, I took one thing away, which is very 

4

important and obviously is also our concern, is the drug problem. 

And one of the things that I took with me is the concern that we 

are not doing a regional effort to combat the cartels. I think that 

we put a lot of money in one country. I don’t think we put enough 

on some of the other countries. And from what I gather is what 

happens, when we fight in Mexico or we put some money in some 

of the other countries, the other countries become roots. And it is 

that old expression of the balloon. You squeeze it here and something else pop out someplace else. 

So I have been saying this since I got to Congress, that our effort 

has to be a regional effort. This is not now that we are in the minority, but when we were in the majority we always talked about 

a regional effort. And it was just confirmed in talking with some 

of the Presidents at the Summit. They are concerned that they are 

not getting enough assistance to help us fight the drug problem. 

The other thing that concerns me is that it seems that we are 

trending away from the Western Hemisphere and looking at SouthCentral Asia and the Middle East, and some of the money seems 

to be going there. I think that there is no better opportunity for us 

than in the Western Hemisphere. And to take money away at this 

time, I don’t think is really the best policy that this country can 

have. 

And with that I will end, and I will let the Assistant Secretary 

make her comments, then I have some questions for the Assistant 

Secretary later. Thank you, Chairman. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you. And now I would like to recognize Mr. Rivera from Miami for 2 minutes for an opening statement. 

Mr. RIVERA. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Madam Secretary, thank you for being here. Very nice to see you again after 

spending some time together in Cartagena. 

In terms of my opening statement, I just want to give you some 

of my reflections based on our trip to participate and observe the 

Summit of the Americas in Cartagena, Colombia. And one of the 

biggest concerns that I took away from that Summit was this notion that I believe President Santos had introduced maybe weeks 

or months earlier. When the issue of Cuba’s integration into the 

Summit process came up, President Santos talked about perhaps 

the need to redefine our definition of democracy. Because as we 

know, one of the premises of the Summit process is of course participation of democratic nations. And I think it is a very dangerous 

slippery slope that we get into if Presidents start talking about redefining democracy, because I think there are a lot of tyrants 

around the world and certainly in Latin America, or prospective tyrants that could seek refuge in the notion that we somehow need 

to redefine democracy just to make an accommodation or to apologize for a communist, totalitarian dictatorship in Cuba. 

So I want to explore that a little more in my question and answer session, but I certainly want you to know that I hope this administration will summarily reject the notion that democracy needs 

to be redefined somehow in order so that we can accommodate tyrants like the Castro brothers, because all that will do is encourage 

further anti-democratic behavior in the hemisphere. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

5

Mr. MACK. Thank you, Mr. Rivera. I would now like to recognize 

our witness. And first of all, again, congratulations on your appointment and nomination. 

The honorable Roberta Jacobson currently serves as the Assistant Secretary for the Western Hemisphere Affairs Bureau. She has 

had a long and distinguished career, and we mean that in a good 

way, with the State Department, and on issues relating to the 

Western Hemisphere. You are certainly no stranger to the committee, to the Hemisphere, and we value your input and direction 

and look forward to a spirited conversation about how we improve 

our relations in Latin America to do what, I think, most people desire and that is see the cause of freedom and democracy extended 

to all. 

So with that I recognize the Assistant Secretary for 5 minutes for 

her opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ROBERTA S. JACOBSON, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE, BUREAU OF WESTERN 

HEMISPHERE AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

Ms. JACOBSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much. Chairman 

Mack, Ranking Member Engel, members of the committee, it is a 

privilege to be here today, and it is particularly nice to be back in 

this chamber after an absence of several months. And I really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you, and the support and 

engagement that this subcommittee has given to our efforts in the 

Western Hemisphere. I also thank all of you for being in 

Cartagena, Colombia, and I look forward to talking about the Summit of the Americas with you. 

We are fortunate that in our hemisphere we are overwhelmingly 

presented with opportunities to advance U.S. objectives and promote democracy and greater prosperity for the United States and 

all the countries of the region. As you noted, the President’s and 

the Secretary’s engagements in Colombia demonstrated the power 

of this vision to expand social and economic opportunity, but the 

Summit also provided an opportunity to continue our work standing up for shared democratic values in the Americas. We are especially engaged in responding to threats against democratic governance and freedom of expression, threats to citizen security and 

threats from external actors in the Western Hemisphere that directly impact the security of the United States. 

The Summit of the Americas showcased the region’s rapid 

change. Although obscured by reporting on other issues, the Summit highlighted the many practical ways that governments and citizens in the Americas are coming together to solve problems and 

build a more successful and connected future. President Obama reinforced the spirit of partnership that has been at the core of his 

administration’s policy in the region. The Colombian Government’s 

program for this year’s Summit, including the CEO forum and civil 

society forums, was a successful example of what Secretary Clinton 

calls ‘‘the three-legged stool of a democratic society,’’ accountable 

governments, private sectors creating opportunities and engaged 

civil societies. 

The initiative that we launched at the Summit included the establishment of the Small Business Network of the Americas to proVerDate 0ct 09 2002 09:19 Jul 19, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\WH\042512\74000 HFA PsN: SHIRL
6

vide technical assistance to small and medium sized enterprises 

and encourage American SMEs to take advantage of the market in 

this region, announcement of the Women’s Entrepreneurship network, advancement of the President’s 100,000 Strong in the Americas effort to increase student exchanges, expansion of regional 

broadband capacity, and support for innovations efforts in development. I am especially enthusiastic about the United States’ role in 

the creation of Colombia’s Connect 2022 initiative to expand electrical connectivity throughout the Americas. 

Through equal partnership and the power of proximity, the 

United States is working with capable regional partners to address 

key challenges facing the people of the Americas. Increasingly, 

these partnerships do not require U.S. assistance, as more and 

more countries become global players and donors in their own 

right. At the same time, transnational crime in the hemisphere has 

caused violence that makes day-to-day life for some of the region’s 

people intolerable. Sustained U.S. engagement and assistance on 

this front is required to counter these threats, to improve the lives 

of people throughout the region and protect our security interests. 

The administration’s Fiscal Year 2013 request of $1.65 billion for 

the Western Hemisphere prioritizes our security initiatives in Mexico, in Colombia, in Central America and in the Caribbean. Our request for these initiatives reflect an emphasis on enhancing capacity and strengthening institutions over the long term. Our assistance draws on the capacity of partners in the hemisphere such as 

Colombia and Mexico, and other international donors such as Canada, the EU, Spain, the Inter-American Development Bank and 

others. Our Fiscal Year 2013 request also prioritizes assistance for 

Haiti to support the country’s ongoing development efforts focused 

on sanitation and health services, expansion of energy infrastructure, economic growth to increase job creation, and improving the 

government’s ability to deliver needed services. In Mexico we continue our shift away from heavy equipment and toward institutional capacity building. We are continuing to work with Colombia 

and its whole-of-government effort to expand state presence in 

former conflict zones and protect human rights and economic development. 

During the Summit of the Americas, the President also announced our intention to seek an increase to at least $130 million 

for our assistance under the Central American Citizens Security 

Partnership in response to continued high levels of violence in that 

region. 

Finally, let me mention that democracy assistance is also a critical component in achieving our goals, and our commitment to democracy and human rights throughout the hemisphere is unwavering. We will continue to support human rights activists and fundamental freedoms around the world, including in challenging environments like Nicaragua, Ecuador, Venezuela and Cuba. 

Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, and I look forward to continuing to work with you to advance U.S. interests in the hemisphere. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Jacobson follows:]

7


74000a-1.eps
8


74000a-2.eps
9


74000a-3.eps
10


74000a-4.eps
11


74000a-5.eps
12


74000a-6.eps
13

Mr. MACK. Thank you very much. Thank you for your opening 

statement, and I now recognize myself 5 minutes for questions. 

I want to explore a little bit more with you the idea that we seem 

to be cutting funds for supporting democratic efforts, but we see an 

increase in funds that goes to the OAS. Can you tell me why is it 

that it appears that—I will just say it this way. It appears that we 

are making it more difficult for our allies, and that the enemies of 

the United States tend to be getting a pass. We see it through the 

FTAs and how long it took in this drawn out campaign of the 

FTAs. We see it now with the Keystone XL pipeline. In foreign policy, if we want to say it matters to be a friend of the United States, 

but then when we have the ability for a Keystone pipeline or for 

the FTAs we drag our allies through the mud. 

Can you kind of explain why it is that funding for democracies 

has gone down while increased funding to the OAS, when the OAS 

has, I believe, failed in its mission? And then why do we tend to 

give a hard time to our allies instead of supporting them with free 

trade agreements and Keystone XL pipeline? 

Ms. JACOBSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think I want to start 

off by saying that we certainly are delighted that the free trade 

agreements are entering into force, that we were able to move 

those ahead, and that they are strong free trade agreements that 

will serve both countries, in each case the bilateral agreements, 

very well. We now have free trade agreements that run from Canada all the way down through South America in many countries of 

the hemisphere, and that remains a very important part of our policy. 

Mr. MACK. But you will admit that it was a very long time, and 

you have to admit that the length of time it took to get them done, 

in relation to how long it takes free trade agreements to get done 

in other places with Latin America countries and other countries, 

has made it difficult for us in the hemisphere. 

Ms. JACOBSON. It did take a long time, there is no doubt. But in 

the end, what we achieved in terms of agreements with all of these 

countries, I think, were stronger agreements. The Labor Action 

Plan and the implementation of that action plan is making a difference on the ground, and we are delighted that this is going to 

open up such new opportunities for American jobs and for the 

economies in the region. 

But when it comes to supporting democracies and supporting our 

allies, let me start with, for example, the Citizen Security initiatives, which while Mexico and Colombia are going down, because 

those are countries that are capable of taking over those programs 

certainly as many years after we began Plan Colombia as we now 

are, but in places like Central America the funding is going up because we know that our allies in Central America who are fighting 

this shared responsibility with us need more help to confront this 

problem. 

But I also want to mention that in the OAS there are some critically important efforts that the OAS has undertaken on democracy 

issues where we think we have to continue to support them including financially. That includes election observation and reporting 

and reports that have come out in very challenging environments 

such as Nicaragua. It includes the Special Rapporteur for Press 

14

Freedom, an issue that I know many on this committee are concerned about, and an issue that has been under some pressure in 

the OAS where we think it is important that we continue to fund 

those efforts. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you for your answer. I don’t know that I completely agree. I mean if you just look this graph, it shows that the 

freedom of the press in Latin America has been on a steady decline. 

[Graph shown.] 

Mr. MACK. Again this is one of the things I pointed to in my 

opening statements. I don’t know that this is a show of success for 

what is happening. And I think the OAS stands in the way of democracy, and that we ought to be strengthening our relationships 

with our friends and allies instead of turning it over to the OAS. 

And I know you will disagree, and I am sure we will have plenty 

of time to talk. 

But I want to hit on this idea, or about Cuba for moment, because it was disturbing at the Summit to hear the different countries, so many of them, talk about wanting Cuba to be part of the 

next Summit or be included in the OAS when Cuba is not a democracy. And the idea that we are going to allow a dictatorship to be 

part of an organization that is to promote democracy, and even to 

go so far as to talk about redefining democracy almost like trying 

to create a special space for Cuba that shouldn’t exist. I mean this 

is a country, and I think you would agree with me on this that all 

the tools, everything that needs to happen with Cuba is in their 

hands. With free and fair elections, releasing the political prisoners, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, becoming a democracy they would be welcomed. But I am concerned about the overall 

take in the Western Hemisphere that we are losing ground even 

with our allies on this issue. And I would just like to get your response to that. 

Ms. JACOBSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think the President 

and the Secretary have addressed this issue very well. We certainly 

agree with you that democracy is not a relative concept, it is a universal concept. And it is enshrined in documents in this hemisphere, in the Inter-American Democractic Charter, and in the 

Summit process from 2001, when democractic governance was required of those participating in Summits. And so we too look forward to the day when Cuba can participate in the Summits, but 

that day has not come yet. So we feel very strongly about that, that 

that is a requirement to participate. 

Mr. MACK. You would also say it hasn’t come yet because it is 

Cuba’s responsibility, not the responsibility of the United States or 

any other country in the hemisphere to turn a blind eye to what 

they are doing in——

Ms. JACOBSON. Absolutely, absolutely. The road map has been 

set out for Cuba to take that path and enter back into the interAmerican system. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you. I would now like to recognize Congressman Engel, the ranking member, for 5 minutes for questions. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. You and I 

agree on much of what needs to be done vis-a`-vis the United States 

and in Latin America policy. One of the reasons I supported the 

15

free trade agreements with both Panama and Colombia was that 

I think it is important that we let our friends know that there is 

an upside into being allies with the United States. I think that 

there is a geopolitical reason for us to do these things and I think 

that is very important. And I do agree with the chairman that we 

have to show countries that it is good to align with us, not with 

the Chavez’ of the world, because we are reliable. So we share that. 

I do, however, think that the President did a very good job, and the 

administration did a very good job in the free trade agreements. It 

is very difficult, very politically tricky, and the President did it. 

And it is done and I commend the administration for doing it, and 

I think we are going to see more things like that. 

I also agree with the chairman that the OAS is a far from perfect 

organization. But I think where we disagree is I believe it is the 

best we have. If we don’t strengthen the OAS and if we start pulling back so that the United States does not have as much influence 

as it does on the OAS, we are going to find that the alternatives 

are far worse. For instance, I want to ask the Secretary how does 

she view the CELAC? Is it a competitor to the OAS? Shouldn’t we 

be concerned? I believe we should. That the U.S. is not a member 

but many of the countries antagonistic to the United States in the 

hemisphere, including Cuba, are. 

So it is almost like be careful what you wish for, because if there 

are these other organizations that do not allow the U.S. or Canada 

to participate, I think we are better off staying with the OAS, 

strengthening the OAS, not pulling funds away from the OAS, and 

going with the organization where we have influence and where we 

can help to shape things the way we see it. 

And I do agree with both you and the chairman that, and I said 

it in my opening remarks, that Cuba needs to do a lot more before 

it can be admitted to the OAS or the Summit of the Americas, and 

I almost find it preposterous that they refuse to do more. They still 

have Alan Gross, an American citizen, and yet they think that they 

can just become members of all these organizations without making a change. So I am wondering if you could talk to me about 

CELAC and OAS and these other things that I mentioned. 

Ms. JACOBSON. Thank you very much, Congressman. I think we 

agree on a lot of these issues. Multilateral diplomacy has been a 

big part of this administration’s push. We think that when we act 

with other countries in the hemisphere we get better results, we 

have a stronger position. The best form for doing that, we believe, 

is the OAS. It is the longest standing body in the hemisphere. It 

has got institutions that have been developed to carry out some of 

its functions, technical functions, whether that is election monitoring or the Special Rapporteurs on various issues that I think are 

very important at giving voice to some of these democracy issues 

and others. 

CELAC, honestly, is very new. It is hard to say where it is going 

and what it will be like. Obviously there are lots of different regional organizations, some of which do not include us, and have existed on and off over the past number of years. So I think it is a 

little bit early for us to say whether CELAC really becomes a competitor to the OAS. Our goal is to support the OAS and to continue 

to view the OAS, which someday will have, I think, a democratic 

16

Cuba as a member and thereby include all of the countries of the 

hemisphere, as the primary multilateral vehicle in the hemisphere. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you. Can you talk a little bit about the Summit of the Americas? We all went, all of us up here, all four of us 

up here. And if you listen to the media you hear about the scandal 

with the Secret Service but you don’t hear about the good work 

that was done. What is your assessment of the work that was done 

at the Summit? 

Ms. JACOBSON. Thank you. I guess I would start out by saying 

that the sheer fact, and many of you spoke about this, the President spoke about this, the sheer fact that we were in Cartageda, 

Colombia, safely for a number of days in a hemispheric gathering 

was pretty remarkable after the decade-plus that Colombia has 

been through. And I think in some ways Colombia’s leadership of 

this Summit demonstrated just how far they have come and the 

kind of partnerships we really do want to create throughout the 

hemisphere. And so I think Colombia, as the host and leader of this 

Summit, was very significant. 

Similarly, I think the way they structured this, and I made reference to this in my statement, the way they structured this Summit was a very important model. By having a CEO summit where 

the private sector really, for the first time, was able to have a true 

dialogue with the leaders, and a civil society summit, they set up 

a model which really can serve us well in the future. These Summits can’t be government leaders isolated from those two other constituencies in the hemisphere. 

But lastly, I would note that although there was a lot of commentary on the lack of a political declaration signed by all the leaders at the end of the Summit, it isn’t the first time that that has 

occurred. And unfortunately, we didn’t have consensus on every 

issue. One of these as you know was Cuba, there were others. But 

what is, I think, missing from a lot of the commentary is, there was 

huge amount of support for 16 other paragraphs that everybody 

agreed on. The importance of focusing on energy both traditional, 

conventional, and renewable. The importance of education to make 

societies more competitive in the 21st century. The importance of 

empowering women and small businesses. So unfortunately, the 

focus in the press wasn’t on those pragmatic solutions, but there 

was a huge amount of discussion on those in the Summit itself. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you, Mr. Engel. I would now like to recognize 

Mr. Rivera for 5 minutes for questions. 

Mr. RIVERA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to raise the 

specter of the recent visit between President Obama and Mr. 

Medvedev, Putin’s puppet, in Russia, in which President Obaman 

expressed flexibility or a willingness to be more flexible with respect to U.S.-Russian relations after the upcoming election. And 

Mr. Medvedev’s response that he will of course inform his master, 

Putin, of the President’s willingness for flexibility. Because in essence what the President was signaling to our allies like Poland, 

a great ally, that we are willing to throw them under a bus on an 

issue like missile defense, and risk our own security as well once 

the nuisance of an election is behind President Obama. I think that 

17

was an extraordinary message to be sending to our allies, and a 

very dangerous message to be sending to our foes. 

I know that in Cartagena after the Summit there was a lack of 

consensus as you just cited regarding a statement inviting Cuba to 

participate in the next Summit. And I know some of our diplomats 

saw that as some sort of a victory and that thus maybe we should 

tone down expressing our concerns on this matter, because of 

course that is what diplomats do. They don’t want to make waves. 

But I believe President Obama’s colloquy with Medvedev gives me 

grave concerns on a host of foreign policy and national security 

issues. 

So let me just ask you specifically and directly, did President 

Obama or any member of this administration communicate to representatives of any government, any private assurances of flexibility after this election with respect to Cuba’s admission into the 

Summit process? 

Ms. JACOBSON. Congressman, we did not. 

Mr. RIVERA. Thank you. Let me ask another question very directly. If President Obama is reelected and assuming you continue 

in your post, which I hope you will, and assuming Cuba remains 

the totalitarian dictatorship that exists today when that Summit 

comes up again in Panama, will the United States attend the next 

Summit in Panama if Cuba participates? 

Ms. JACOBSON. I have to say, Congressman, there is so many 

hypotheticals in there. 

Mr. RIVERA. There is only two. President Obama being reelected, 

and Cuba being a totalitarian, communist dictatorship that is on 

the list of terrorist sponsors by your State Department, that your 

State Department has issued. You have placed Cuba on the list of 

terrorist sponsors. If those conditions exist at the next Summit in 

Panama, will the United States participate if Cuba participates? 

Ms. JACOBSON. Congressman, I can’t say definitely what status 

Cuba will have 3 years hence—hang on 1 second. 

Mr. RIVERA. Today’s status. 

Ms. JACOBSON. But if nothing changes then neither would our 

position. 

Mr. RIVERA. So if nothing changes in Cuba with respect to their 

governing structure, and there is an effort to include Cuba, and indeed that effort succeeds and comes to fruition, the United States 

will not participate in the Summit of the Americas in Panama, is 

that correct? 

Ms. JACOBSON. What I can’t do here is make you a promise on 

behalf of the President. I can’t speak for future action by the President. But what I can tell you is nothing will have changed in our 

view that Cuba should not be part of the Summit process until they 

are a democracy and have made changes. If those changes have not 

come, we will not believe they should be part of the Summit process and we will have to confront that at the time that the Summit 

is being planned. It might include lots of different options. 

Mr. RIVERA. Well, I hope a very clear signal will be sent by whatever administration is in power in the White House after these 

elections. That under no circumstances will the United States provide credibility, legitimacy, credence, to a supposedly democratic 

18

process when such an anti-democratic regime like the Castro dictatorship would be participating. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you, Mr. Rivera. Now I would like to recognize 

Mr. Sires for 5 minutes for questions. 

Mr. SIRES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First, let me congratulate 

the Secretary of State and the President for holding firm on not allowing Cuba in the Summit. I know it was not easy. I was very disappointed that the OAS was hiding under a rock in not making any 

comments about this issue. So that is disappointing. 

At the same time, I was more disappointed of what happened 

with our security forces, not only for ruining the Summit for the 

President, but really ruin it for the people of Colombia in what 

they have done over the last 10 years. They tried to put a new face 

on this hemisphere. They worked so hard. And yet the news out 

of Colombia is about what went on with the security forces. They 

all should be dismissed. There is no room for that. And I feel very 

bad for the people of Colombia, they worked very hard. And some 

of my Colombian friends have talked to me and said to me, for 10 

years all we see on CNN and all these other stations is the terrorists in Colombia and what is going on in Colombia. And now after 

this Summit, what we see is about prostitutes in Colombia. So it 

is really a sad commentary on those people that, and I know that 

not all of them did it, but those ten or twelve people that were involved it is really a sad commentary. 

The other thing is, I want you to talk to me a little bit about this 

idea that maybe we are shifting money from the Western Hemisphere and put it on the Middle East and Asia. I am very concerned. I really think that what I took away from the Summit in 

talking to some of those Presidents is that they also are concerned, 

and they are our closest neighbors. And especially what is going on 

with China trying to get a foothold in all these countries. So can 

you just speak a little bit to that? 

Ms. JACOBSON. Absolutely. There is two things I want to mention. One is just, before I turn to the assistance, just how much engagement we have with countries where there is no assistance component. You just saw the visit of President Dilma Rousseff to 

Washington from Brazil, the Secretary went on to Brazil after the 

Summit. We have just multiple dialogues with Brazil. Brazil is 

shifting in their relationship with us vis-a`-vis assistance, to become 

a partner in donating assistance to Africa with us, working together on food security. So some of the closest relationships we 

have are no longer defined by assistance because the countries 

have graduated, have outgrown assistance. And that is a very good 

thing. But it doesn’t mean there is less of a partnership with those 

countries. 

In other cases we have countries where we have had very intense, very large aid relationships like with Colombia, over about 

12 years, and that aid is on a downslope, because of Colombia’s 

success and because of their economic ability to assume greater financial responsibility. Again it does not signify a lessening of our 

commitment to Colombia. It signifies the gradual and managed 

transition of an aid relationship to one where Colombia can take 

on more of that responsibility. 

19

In Mexico the shift is from some large pieces of equipment that 

are expensive, frankly, that we put in the beginning of the Merida 

Initiative despite how long it took to get things there, to one that 

is much more intense on training and building capacity which, 

frankly, is cheaper than helicopters. So I think it is important to 

recognize that while some of those numbers are going down slightly, the intensity of the cooperation is just as great and in some 

cases it is increasing. 

I think that is also true in Central America and in the Caribbean 

where the capacity is not as great, where we really do have to stay 

engaged longer. We have tried to maintain those levels of funding 

and in some cases increase them because we know there isn’t as 

much capacity. So while I know that there is a lot of attention on 

the Middle East, on Asia, on other parts of the world, we think we 

have done a pretty good job at defending levels of assistance that 

will enable us to maintain those intense relationships on issues of 

critical importance to the U.S. 

Mr. SIRES. I am glad to hear that, because one of the concerns 

that some of the Presidents especially in Central America have is 

that they are going to become the root, or they already have become the root where the drugs are going to be transported. And 

they are fearful that they do not have the means to stop it. So I 

do hope that we keep concentrating in those areas. Thank you very 

much. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you. And if the Assistant Secretary doesn’t 

mind, we would like to have another round of questions, and they 

just get easier. 

I want to go back. There is clearly a difference of opinion with 

the OAS, and I respect that other people have a different opinion 

than mine. But what concerns me about the OAS is, we saw what 

happened in Honduras, and I believe that the OAS instead of 

standing up for the people of Honduras and their democracy and 

constitution, instead sided with Chavez and Zelaya. And in fact, I 

think that our own administration had the wrong position and the 

State Department had the wrong position. 

So I don’t know why we continue to, the idea of multilateral, bilateral, if you are part of an organization that ultimately brings 

down the overall strength of democracy in an attempt to try to be 

friends with everybody, that is not getting us anywhere. And you 

keep pointing to the work it does in monitoring elections. There are 

some who think they do good work monitoring elections, but there 

are some, including myself, that don’t. 

We will have a longer discussion about this and maybe we will 

invite you back and have another hearing on the OAS. Because I 

do believe that they stand in the way of democracy building and 

protecting democracies in Latin America instead of supporting democracies. And there shouldn’t be a question. People shouldn’t 

have to guess where the OAS or the United States or any other democracy would stand on these issues. And like Congressman Sires 

said, sometimes when they are quiet on issues as it relates to 

Cuba, it causes a lot of problems here in the United States. 

But I wanted to turn quickly to Argentina. I believe, and I have 

for awhile now, that Argentina is up to no good and is turning 

20

away from freedom, democracy. We see it with the taking of business assets, when they play shenanigans with us, accusing the 

United States of doing things, and then we know that there are 

court documents and court proceedings that they continue to ignore. So I just would like to get from your perspective, from the 

State Department’s perspective, where you see Argentina in its relationships to the United States. Do you see it one that is challenged or one that is on solid footing? 

Ms. JACOBSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that 

question. And I guess I would say it is a difficult relationship, and 

it is one in which we are working very hard to try and focus on 

the things we can move ahead on, focus on the positive. 

I was in Argentina in February. I studied there as a student. It 

is a place I have a great fondess for. And we are trying to move 

ahead in areas that we can and that are positive. But frankly, 

there are areas of the relationship that are very challenging and 

which are not moving ahead, and some of those are Argentina’s relationship to the international financial community. 

You made reference, I think, to some of the outstanding claims, 

the arbitral awards by ICSID, as the acronym is known, which Argentina has not paid. That was the reason that we announced at 

the end of March, recommendation to suspend Argentina’s GSP 

privileges, certain trade privileges. We think that Argentina needs 

to get itself back into a positive relationship with the international 

financial community both for their own economic future and for the 

system and those creditors in the United States and elsewhere. So 

that continues to be a very challenging part of the relationship. 

The security relationship is also not back to normal yet. We 

would like it to get there, but since the incident with the DoD 

plane over a year ago, we have not been able to work as much on 

issues like narcotics trafficking that we would like to. So we are 

still committed to working with Argentina on lots of issues, counterterrorism, educational issues, et cetera, but there are challenges 

in that relationship. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you very much, my time has expired. And Congressman Sires, do you have another question? You are recognized 

for 5 minutes. 

Mr. SIRES. Can you talk a little bit about the progress that we 

have made in Haiti with the money that we have given them, in 

terms of infrastructure and basic services? Because I know a lot of 

people are concerned that we are putting a lot of money in Haiti 

and maybe it is not getting to the people. So can you just talk a 

little bit about that? 

Ms. JACOBSON. Sure, thank you. There is no doubt, I think, in 

anyone’s mind that we would all like to see the assistance that has 

been appropriated for Haiti and that is being delivered to Haiti, 

implemented faster and affect people on the ground faster. I think 

the last year has seen an acceleration of the implementation of 

those funds. Half of the rubble from the earthquake has now been 

cleared. That took a very long time, but that is critically important. 

You have the number of internally displaced persons going down 

from about 1.5 million to below 0.5 million. People moving into 

housing. Obviously great efforts being made against cholera to try 

and control the spread of that in sanitation and health services. 

21

But there is still a huge amount to be done, and there is no 

doubt that we have to continue to, frankly, keep our foot to the 

pedal here because there is a huge amount to be done. And frankly, 

some of that needs to be done with a Government of Haiti that has 

a Prime Minister in place. And so as you know the Prime Minister, 

previous Prime Minister, has resigned. He is in caretaker capacity. 

A new Prime Minister has been nominated, passed by their Senate. 

And we are hopeful that that person will be passed by the lower 

House and that then we will able to accelerate the efforts still further. But there is a great deal more to be done. 

Mr. SIRES. I know that the private sector has helped immensely 

in Haiti. How is the coordination between the private sector and 

us in terms of whatever is needed to work together on? 

Ms. JACOBSON. I think that is obviously a critical part of the reconstruction effort. There are a number of major projects, whether 

it is port projects, whether it is an industrial park that is scheduled 

to open fairly soon, the private sector role in all of this and its coordination with the international community and the donors has 

been critical throughout. And that communication will continue to 

be very strong. 

Mr. SIRES. Thank you, Chairman. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you, Mr. Sires. Mr. Rivera, recognized for 5 

minutes. 

Mr. RIVERA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Madam Secretary, it has 

been the policy of this administration since it was inaugurated visa`-vis U.S-Cuba relations, to loosen travel and trade regulations and 

sanctions on the Castro dictatorship. The result of that policy, 

which I often refer to as unilateral concessions to the dictatorship, 

have been well documented. 

A wave of oppression across the island. Cuba continues to harbor 

fugitives from U.S. justice including cop killers and drug traffickers. Cuba continues to be on the State Department list of sponsors of terrorism, even going to the extent of taking and holding a 

United States citizen, Alan Gross, hostage in Cuba with an expressed willingness, as Bill Richardson’s trip to Havana demonstrates, an expressed willingness to try to trade that hostage to 

the United States. Is there anything else the Castro dictatorship 

could do that would actually trigger this administration to tighten 

sanctions? 

Ms. JACOBSON. Well, Congressman, let me start off by saying 

that the People to People programs, the regulatory changes to 

allow purposeful travel to Cuba are not designed as anything that 

benefits the regime. They are designed to benefit the Cuban people. 

They are designed to allow more contact outside of government for 

Cuban citizens and American citizens in particular areas. And so 

we don’t see those as positive for the Government of Cuba but for 

the people of Cuba. 

We have kept all of the embargo provisions in place. As you 

know those are, by law those are not ones that could change in regulation, and there is no plan to change those at this point. We have 

also engaged with the Cuban Government only on issues, frankly, 

that are in our national interest. That are in our national security 

interest when it is critical to our interests to do so. So we believe 

that we have kept a very firm line on sanctions with the Cuban 

22

Government but tried to open up space for average Cubans separate from their government. 

Mr. RIVERA. Can you cite any progress in democratic reforms on 

the island that have resulted from that policy? 

Ms. JACOBSON. Congressman, I can’t give you specific examples 

yet of areas in which citizens have yet been able to exercise more 

freely, political rights. I wish I could. But I do believe, and I am 

sure that you would agree, that American citizens are often the 

best amabassadors for our country. And I do think that that increased contact helps bring us closer to——

Mr. RIVERA. Well, of course that contact did not begin with this 

administration. We have always had travel, family unification and 

other types of licensed travel to Cuba, and it hasn’t resulted in any 

democratic reforms. 

But let me just go, I only have a minute left, to Venezuela very 

quickly, because my understanding is that in January of this year 

you were sent documents from the Venezuelan Ministry of Justice 

implicating Hugo Chavez in covering up a case involving a 2.2 ton 

shipment of cocaine in November 2005, and that according to these 

materials, President Chavez was notified in writing of ‘‘sufficient 

evidence linking then Brigadier General Henry de Jesus Rangel 

Silva in a smuggling case’’ and that rather than ordering an inquiry of this denunciation of Rangel Silva’s involvement in narcotics trafficking, Chavez has actually named him his Minister of 

Defense. And I am wondering what action, if any, was taken to expose this apparent criminality. 

Ms. JACOBSON. Congressman, all I can say on that is that when 

we receive information about potential wrongdoing, allegations of 

wrongdoing in Venezuela as in every other country, we make sure 

that we pass those documents to the relevant U.S. intelligence and 

law enforcement agencies, and continue to look at those very carefully for potential future actions. 

Mr. RIVERA. Thank you very much. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you very much, Mr. Rivera. I have one more 

round of questions, and if you don’t mind, well, we will make this 

the last one. 

One of the other issues that was talked to quite a bit during our 

meetings at the Summit was this notion of legalizing drugs. And 

I wanted to first give you a minute, if you would like to, here on 

the record here in the committee, state the official position of the 

administration and State Department and our U.S. Government. 

Ms. JACOBSON. Sure. Very quickly I can tell you that that is not 

a direction the United States Government believes we should go, 

that legalization is not the answer to this problem. But we understand the frustration of countries with the violence and the difficulty in confronting trafficking, and we have to discuss a whole 

lot of options to confront it, but we don’t believe legalization in the 

way to go. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you. I think it is important. Obviously this is 

an area where we agree very much, and was concerned that there 

was so much talk about it in Latin America at the Summit on this 

idea that dialogue is good. Well, dialogue is good, but there are certain things you don’t put on the table. And we think that legalizing 

drugs is one of those issues that just should not be on the table. 

23

We know in the United States we have an epidemic on prescription 

drug abuse, and those are legal drugs but it is the number one killer over cocaine and heroin combined. I just wanted to give you an 

opportunity here on the record. So I think that is an area we agree. 

The last question that I have is, I want to talk about Mexico a 

little bit. The drug cartels in Mexico have certainly evolved over 

time, and there is no doubt that they are operating in countries 

other than just Mexico. We know that they are operating here in 

the United States. We know that they have, operating in Central 

and South America. And the Merida Initiative, although I think we 

all think it is good, I am not sure that it is a program that is situated to handle the evolution in Mexico. And I know it is a touchy 

subject. Every time I bring up counterinsurgency we get our friends 

that aren’t happy with me. 

But I believe that if we are going to be successful in confronting 

these insurgencies in Mexico, then it is going to take an all-of-government approach. And I am concerned that the Merida Initiative 

lacks some of the ability to do that, and I would like to just get 

your opinion on those issues. 

Ms. JACOBSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think you know that 

I have worked on Mexico for quite a long time, and I completely 

agree that a whole-of-government approach is absolutely what is 

needed. What I think is important to remember is that the Merida 

Initiative and the foreign assistance that the State Department administers, which we work with our colleagues in USAID within the 

State Department in our International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Office, but also with our colleagues in DEA, in FBI, in DHS, 

both ICE and others, is only part of what we work with Mexico on. 

There are also programs under DoD and for the U.S. military to 

work jointly with counterparts in Mexico on training. So we feel 

like we really have crossed the law enforcement and security force 

spectrum to include all the best ideas to respond to the threat and 

to work with counterparts. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you, I appreciate that. But I guess that I see 

it a little differently, and we are back to this kind of silo mentality. 

And what I am talking about is, how do we approach this where 

when we do an all-of-government approach that all of government 

is actually working together in a coordinated effort? And absolutely 

I know that there are many agencies, departments in the U.S. Government that is participating in Mexico, but I am concerned about 

the coordination. And that I know that there has been advances. 

But I think if we have a program that is going to look at it as one, 

if you will, that instead of having the silo mentalities of how we 

are going to deal with the insurgents in Mexico, because look, 

frankly, the people who live along the southern border are fearful. 

And so you have drugs and criminals and terrorist organizations 

that are trying to move north across the border, and you have guns 

and money that is moving south. 

So it is a shared interest to secure that border and also to ensure 

that the insurgents in Mexico don’t have the ability to continue to 

operate in the United States and in Central and South America. So 

I think this whole-of-government approach needs to be done under 

one spectrum instead of the silo effect that we have now. 

24

I will just leave that with you, and thank you very much. Next 

is Mr. Sires for 5 minutes. 

Mr. SIRES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have a situation in 

Venezuela where the President is obviously in Cuba for treatment 

and elections are in October. One way maybe that the OAS can become useful is by sending monitors to the election process and be 

observers. I was just wondering if anything like that has been discussed or anything with the OAS, and then do you know what kind 

of plans are we making in case Chavez doesn’t leave Cuba? 

Ms. JACOBSON. Congressman, we certainly believe that international and domestic election observers will be very important in 

Venezuela, and we would strongly support election observation 

missions for the October elections. There is obviously lots of different organizations that may be able to do that. Within the OAS 

context, the Venezuelan Government would have to request the 

OAS monitor the elections. We hope they will do that. And we certainly are talking with partners and folks around the hemisphere 

to encourage election monitoring. But we think it is equally important that domestic organizations be able to monitor the elections 

within Venezuela. 

And in terms of the issues of President Chavez’ health, we really 

don’t have any more information than everybody else has, but we 

are obviously watching things very closely making sure we have 

good information, reaching out to Venezuelans of all stripes as we 

have over the last number of years, and will continue to do regardless of his health status. 

Mr. SIRES. Thank you very much. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you, Mr. Sires. Now I will recognize Mr. Rivera for 5 minutes for questions. 

Mr. RIVERA. Thank you very much, and pleasantly surprised that 

we get another round. I didn’t know we would. So maybe I will ask 

about Cuba. 

And something very interesting happened in the Summit, and 

again just want you to kind of have a full association moment here. 

But Congressman Sires and Congressman Mack and Congressman 

Engel and I, we were in some meetings where I remember some 

of us asked Presidents of Latin American countries, why is it that 

there is this push to reintegrate Cuba into the Summit process so 

vehemently amongst some Presidents? And we actually had Presidents tell us in a moment of candor that the main reason is because many Latin American countries fear upheaval and civil unrest among the more leftist sectors of their society, labor groups, 

student groups, nongovernment organizations that are very sympathetic and have alignments and nexus with the Castro dictatorship. 

And so in order to prevent those types of disturbances and civil unrest, they kowtow to the Castro brothers. We actually heard that 

from Latin American Presidents. 

President Calderon from Mexico was here yesterday. We met 

with him. And I asked him what he could cite as the success of 

over 50 years of engagement by Latin America in Cuba, what 

democratic reforms they can cite. Because they always call our policy a failure, so I asked him for the successes in terms of democratic reforms of engagement in Cuba by Mexico and other Latin 

American countries. And his response was, well, we were able to 

25

extract Mexican citizens from Cuba’s prisons. And again, he stated 

how Cuba had these relationships with terrorist organizations like 

the FARC, but they never had terrorist problems in Mexico precisely because of their friendly relationship with the Castro brothers. 

And so you have so much experience in Latin America, and I am 

just going to ask you that whatever candor you can give here within the parameters of being a diplomat and a representative of the 

U.S. Government, does any of this ring true to you? 

Ms. JACOBSON. I guess the part that rings true is that all politicians have different constituencies to engage with, but I also think 

the President said it really well when he talked about moving beyond left and right. And there are universal standards that we in 

this hemisphere have signed up to, and I think some of those old 

debates about the left and the right domestically in countries 

throughout the hemisphere are just not as relevant as they used 

to be. 

Mr. RIVERA. So do you believe that Latin American leaders fear 

the connections between the Castro brothers and leftist elements 

whether they be terrorist elements or civil elements in their societies, and therefore that is why they seem to be so compliant toward the Castro dictatorship? 

Ms. JACOBSON. I think it is very hard for me to assert what they 

may feel or——

Mr. RIVERA. I am asking just based on your experience as a diplomat throughout Latin America. 

Ms. JACOBSON. No, I appreciate that. I really do, I appreciate 

that and I appreciate your confidence that I can ascertain sort of 

the reasons behind this. But I certainly think as I said, I guess, 

in the start, they all have constituencies. So there may be some element of political evaluation that this is an issue on which the left 

cares deeply, and they may want to address that particular constituency. 

Mr. RIVERA. Well, I appreciate that. I have 1 minute left and I 

would like to ask you with respect to the Millennium Challenge 

funds in Central America, particularly in El Salvador. We have 

seen what has been happening with El Salvador and confiscation 

of U.S. investments in El Salvador and so forth, and in other countries in Central America. Do you think it is time for perhaps the 

United States to reassess our relationship in terms of these programs with these countries that are having, I guess, offensive behavior really toward U.S. interest in these countries? 

Ms. JACOBSON. Congressman, I think it is very important that 

we pursue issues of potential expropriation or takings of properties 

with governments whether it is El Salvador or others in the hemisphere, and we are going to do that pretty agressively. But I don’t 

think we have come to the conclusion that it would necessarily be 

productive to end relationships through the MCC or other of our 

assistance programs which go to some of the poorest in those countries, and we continue to believe are very important programs. 

That doesn’t mean we are not going to work on the issues of potential takings or expropriations. 

Mr. RIVERA. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

26

Mr. MACK. Thank you, Mr. Rivera. And for the last question, 

Congressman Engel is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have all mentioned 

Cuba and I mentioned Alan Gross. I am wondering if you could just 

update us. Is there anything new about him? It is just really an 

outrage that the Castro government continues to hold him on 

trumped-up charges, and it is just a disgrace. Anything new with 

that? 

Ms. JACOBSON. Mr. Engel, I really wish I could bring you some 

new news there. I truly do. This is an issue that I have been working very hard personally, but more importantly so have my boss, 

Under Secretary Sherman, and the Secretary and others. And we 

have used just about every means that we could to try and get 

Alan Gross home where he belongs with his family. We had some 

hope that the Cuban Government would take the opportunity of 

the Pope’s visit to make this gesture and to release Alan Gross. His 

mother’s 90th birthday was just about 10 days ago while we were 

in Cartagena. She is very ill with lung cancer. There is just no reason to hold this man and not to allow him to be home with his family. And we will continue to use every mechanism that we can, but 

I have no progress on that front to report to you. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you. We have all made the point that Cuba 

has not moved at all toward democracy and why it should not participate in another conference if it hasn’t changed. Democracy 

aside, and that is the most important issue, but something as small 

as this, the Government of Cuba has shown its total intransigence 

on every matter, not just democracy, not just allowing political pluralism, not just to human rights. This is an American citizen who 

does not by any stretch of the imagination deserve to be incarcerated. And they won’t even budge on that. 

So it is very disheartening that people want to still give them a 

free pass and say that we should just keep a blind eye and just pretend, that it doesn’t matter what kind of government any country 

has, we are all of the same. And I think that undermines the organizations and the countries that talk that way. It really diminishes 

them. 

Could you talk to me about the CIFTA treaty, the gun trafficking 

CIFTA treaty. The State Department has confirmed that the U.S. 

in compliance with CIFTA, and is this true, and what is the status 

of treaty and efforts to get it ratified in the Senate? 

Ms. JACOBSON. Thank you, Congressman. We, as you know had 

sent the CIFTA treaty, the small arms treaty, to the Senate after 

it was signed in 1997. What has changed since then, I am happy 

to say, is that the treaty is on the State Department’s or the administration’s list of priority treaties, and that is as of last October 

when that went forward to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. So we are still hoping that there will be movement on that 

treaty. 

Most importantly, I think it is important to make clear that 

there are no U.S. laws or regulations that would have to change 

for implementation of the CIFTA treaty. It recognizes legal rights 

to own guns and weapons, and we do not believe there is a conflict 

between the CIFTA treaty and the laws and the rights that AmerVerDate 0ct 09 2002 09:19 Jul 19, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\WH\042512\74000 HFA PsN: SHIRL
27

ican citizens enjoy. So we hope that it will move ahead. We think 

it is important in the hemisphere. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you. Let me ask you a question about Colombia. I mentioned before that I supported the FTA with Colombia, 

and I believe that Colombia is a tremendous example of a country 

that works with us, is a strong ally, and I can’t say anything more. 

I am very pleased with the fact that they have done everything expected of them. But can you tell me if Colombia has fully implemented the Labor Action Plan? Because there has been some talk 

that they have not, and if that is not true, which sections still require implementation and is there a firm timetable for implementation? 

Ms. JACOBSON. Congressman, I think that Ron Kirk, the U.S. 

Trade Representative said it pretty well in Cartagena when he 

talked about the Colombian Government reaching all of the milestones that we expected and hoped for in the Labor Action Plan. 

They are clearly making serious efforts to protect trade unionists, 

to ensure that there are prosecutions of cases of violence against 

union leaders, and that we were pleased enough with that progress 

obviously for the free trade agreement to be put into effect. But I 

will tell you that there still are things that need to be done, and 

we will continue to work with the Colombian Government really 

without an end date but continue to work with them to implement 

fully those provisions and to continue to improve the record on 

trade unions. 

Mr. ENGEL. I don’t know if when I was out of the room if we 

talked a lot about Mexico. What is the status of Merida? Are the 

funds still flowing? We still know there is lots of help that the 

Mexicans need, and I think in terms of our relationships with countries, all the countries to our south, none is more important than 

our relationship with Mexico. Obviously we share a large border. 

They have been a good ally, and what happens down there affects 

us up here and vice versa. 

Ms. JACOBSON. Congressman, we are very happy that the pace 

of implementation has accelerated pretty dramatically in Mexico. 

The Secretary committed that last calendar year we would implement $500 million in assistance, and we hit that goal, made it just 

over that so that we are over $900 million implemented already in 

the Merida Initiative. But we are continuing. That number continues to increase, and to continue to work with the Mexicans. And 

now the shift is also to work with Mexican states. Because Mexican 

police are over 400,000 in state and local jurisdictions and only 

40,000 at the Federal level. So there is clearly a lot more we still 

have to do, but there is huge progress that has been made. 

Mr. ENGEL. Okay, I see my time is up. So I want to thank you 

again, and thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you, Mr. Engel. And thank you very much for 

your time, for your responsiveness to our questions. We appreciate 

it so much and we look forward to the next time we can have you 

back in front of the committee and continue the dialogue, so thank 

you very much. 

The committee hearing is now adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:28 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(29)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD

30

f


74000n.eps
31


74000m-1.eps
32

f


74000m-2.eps
33

PREPARED STATEMENT AND MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE HONORABLE CONNIE MACK, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA, AND CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE


74000b.eps
34


74000c-1.eps
35


74000c-2.eps
36

Æ


74000c-3.eps